Use of hand signals

No, it is not. His point is that in HS soccer around the country you have a huge variance in skill and knowledge level of players, coaches, spectators. The excessive hand-signals that are used may be helpful in those situations. However, under USSF there (generally) is more understanding of the game and therefore they are not needed and should not be used.

 

Have fun, guys.

 

What I object to is REQUIRING those signals (which must have been thought of by some anti-soccer person) for ALL fouls. I would prefer that the referee had the discretion to give a signal or not to do so. When I gave HS signals years ago when they were required, most of the players still asked what that signal meant.

In USSF, there is nothing that forbids signals. When there is a call that may be off the ball or may have been difficult to see by the other players and spectators, it is good to answer polite questions and quizzical looks with a subdued or modest signal. What USSF does not want is undue attention brought to the referee because of his/her overly demonstrative signals (i.e. HS signals).

I was privileged to have worked a game with Mr. Kleinaitis, and he often used subtle signals to tell the players what he called, and this communication, I believe, helped his overall control of the match. If it helps, why shouldn't we use them too.

 

That is correct - a nice summary of USSF stance on this issue.

 

In practice, I do not see the re-introduced signals as having that much impact on the NF game or how we officiate it. They were never a big deal back in the days when they were previously required, no one paid that much attention or even noticed when the rules we revised, and they were dropped, and it should not be that big a deal now that they are back.

Yes, they can make us look a little silly, and frankly we probalby don't need any help in that area, but when one condsiders that in NF coaches do have status and had always had the right to ask us what a call was, and when a player is cautioned or sent-off we are required to provide a reason to both coaches, these signals could actually come in handy.

Here is the linke to a PDF file of the new signals:

http://www.nfhs.org/PDF/Soccer/soccersignals.pdf

When you look at these, you will probably realize that even though the selection is quite extensive, and there are certain signals we will probably never need, there are others whcih are missing.

 

Hand Sgnalsi

Without knowing what they are, I agree with some earlier made comment, about being "made up" by someone who doesn't know anything about football (soccer).
The game is simple to play, and simple laws. (rules).
It's probably got a lot to do with the fact that in most other American sports hand signals are used often, and someone is trying to "Americanise" soccer.
Remember the days of the 35 yard "shoot out" in the old NASL.?!!
I recall the late great England captain Bobby Moore who played in the NASL stating, "We want the soccerisation of America, not the Americanisation of soccer".
(Even to the point of requesting 4 quarters and not 2 halves in the World Cup 2002).
Whether it is because it is the world game which America did not have a hand in inventing, and are now trying to put their 10 cents worth in, I know not.
There's not a great deal wrong with the game, and there are enough changes brought about and requested by FIFA without adding to, or trying to make more complicated.
If it's to let coaches know what is happening then perhaps they should try to understand the game more.
As I referee regularly in the USA I am surprised as to how many coaches I have met who haven't even played the game.
The best signal to give and let people see is "play on" with the outstretched arms.

 

Direct & Indirect Free Kicks

A quick history lesson here, although no prizes awarded.
Does anyone know the reason why and where the use of the raised arm came into being to distinguish between the direct and indirect free kick?
I will post the answer this coming Wednesday if no one comes up with it beforehand.

 

Please Exercise Care Regarding Duplicate Threads

Jeff, I am posting this here in the event you do not know how to retrieve private mail. This marks the 3 or 4th redundant thread that I have had to merge. I had previously asked you via PM to exercise care when opening threads that were a duplication of a previous thread. If you do not check this thread on a daily basis, I would suggest you review the previous X number of days posts since you last visited, since all posts older than 24 hours are not displayed in the forum. However, just because they are not displayed does not mean they have disappeared into the ether. It means you must take the time to review and read the threads to avoid unecessary duplication and additional work for the moderators of this board. Your anticipated cooperation is greatly appreciated.

Al

 

Re: Re: Re: Use of hand signals

What point are you trying to make? Your initial point seemed to be that you were hopeful that USSF might be going to follow HS lead by adopting more demonstartive signals (we're not). Now you seem to be saying that we should not be doing so (again, we're not).
What IS your point? Seriously ?

 

High School Is Different

Before we all get too crazy (again!) over the issue of hand signals, we need to remember and accept the fact that high school sports are different than club. In many states, including mine (PA), the primary emphasis is supposed to be upon participation by the students. (A nice ideal that isn't always fulfilled.) Often you end up with players, parents and even coaches who have little or no prior experience with the sport. The team is an extension of the school and the education process, which is why many schools would rather employ a teacher as their coach even though that individual may have very little prior experience with the specific sport. In many high school soccer programs, coaches and spectators are all specifically recognized as having a legitimate role to play. It is against that backdrop that the concept of hand signals must be considered. In short, as referees we are expected to help to educate everyone, even during the match. I'm not saying that I like using them, but the federation adopted them because the schools (through their state associations) said they wanted them. They take all of about 1 to 2 seconds to execute and they have absolutely no impact in delaying the restart if done after signaling the direction for the restart. In my experience they have not led to an increase in dissent, which is often predicted by those who have not actually had to use them. As a practical matter, the players don't even bother to look to see the signal since they are already repositioning themselves for the restart. Whether they do anything positive for the coaches or spectators is pretty much a subjective answer, but this is what the schools say they want us to do for now. No big deal.

 

I agree with pkCrouse on his assessment of the situation.

One thing I'm wondering is if these schools that want us to do it are going to be providing any kind of handout for the spectators showing the signals.

If not, the signals are going to be useless. They still won't know what's being called.

 

I think it's a bit naive to simply state the organizers want to put their "stamp" on the game. We all come from mainly the same background for the most part and I guarantee they don't have people who know nothing of soccer making up these signals.

The primary reasons are for record-keeping and clarity for all involved. Around here the reporters love the extra signals so they can keep track of who is doing what when they write their articles. It also does let the fans, players, and coaching staff know exactly what's going on.

Now, I'm opposed to the signals because of their basic silliness detracting from the professionalism referees so strongly aspire to achieve. We're all for more personal communication and "reading the game." Adding more signals such as these almost detracts from the personal nature of refereeing and keeping control of the game, despite their good intention.

The truth is they have both their pros and cons. I don't care much for them but won't really argue too strongly against them either. Besides, high school sure pays a lot more money for that level than you'll find in the local USSF club

 

HORSE HOCKEY!

This is a typical "purist" attitude, that high school soccer is sub-standard to club ball. It's just the opposite. It's more organized, it's less geared to develop a master race of players trying to get scholarships and careers, and it involves the spirit of the COMMUNITY, rather than rich, elitist parents.

I do both and high school is in now way sub-standard to club ball. Personally I feel it's more superior. Oh, you can create a master race team taking the best players in the area or state, and create an unbeatable club team, but high school is borne out of true community competition, and with good coaching (now coming from the clubs), the high schools have far better competitive teams.

To suggest that the players and coaches and spectators are naive compared to club ball is insulting. THEY'RE THE SAME PEOPLE AS IN CLUB SOCCER! In Colorado there is no alternative to high school soccer during the appropriate season. You can play on the amateur adult leagues, but that's it. If high school soccer is so backward and naive, why are all the top players, coaches, and parents participating?

Lets dump this nonsense attitude.

 

The benefit of signals

Signals were used in high school soccer about 10+ years ago, and they were never a problem. Now that new high school referees are faced with a new requirement, it's becaome controversial. It worked then, it will now.

The problem is the attitude with soccer officials themselves. We enjoy being secret managers of the game. We keep time secret including when time runs out, we don't have to explain our calls, we don't have to even define our decisions. We love this power, and we relinquish it stubbornly.

How many times have we been asked "what's the call ref?" Now this comes in various "tones" and "intents." We puff up our chests and state we don't have to "explain" our decisions, well that's true when the challenge is made with the intent to "challenge" the decision or invite debate. But the prudent referee will take time to explain, if only briefly. This policy prevent any need for asking what the call is. It's signaled. Granted many will not learn them, but should the referee have to explain signals?

I feel it's arrogant of referees to suggest "if people don't know what the call is, they have not business being there." Like everyone knows what was called. Hell, the ARs don't even know sometimes. That play in the box that results in a mysterious PK call, when no player is on the ground and little or no contact is made, is always the mystery call. But when the referee signals "handling," it might be debatable, but at least it's understandable, why it wasn't obvious.

They are not "required" in the mandatory, every decision. . . sense. They are just required to be attempted. Even NFHS clearly clarifies, that referees should not hold up quick kicks or restarts, ,and get down field without needing to signal. Some of the obvious decisions, don't signal. No one is going to criticise you for not signalling. Signal when it's confusing, and time permits. THe signals have improved immensely from what they used to be. As someone said, we all use "unofficial" signals in USSF ball, to explain controversial calls, or no calls, or when the information might defuse confustion and frustration. As an assessor we're instructed not to penalize for "unofficial" signals unless they're used excessively.

Give them a chance, and if you don't officiate high school, you ain't poop ;o)

 

A few hand signals for the more common fouls might be appropriate in all games. Or maybe the ref could signal only when two players collide in a way that leaves some doubt as to who was at fault.

I think I understand the rules and the laws as much as the next fan. But, I still find myself asking "What's the call ref?" during games in which I am playing. I am the captain so the ref usually gives a prompt and short reply. Sometimes, even after the explanation I'm not sure what he saw that I didn't. But at least I understand what infractions the ref is sensitive to and can pass it on to teammates at halftime.

As captain, part of my job is to read which fouls a ref is a real stickler for, and pass this on to my teammates. Hand signals would make my job as captain easier